portfolio standards and the promotion of combined heat and ...€¦ · march 2016 final report ....

Portfolio Standards

and the Promotion of

Combined Heat And Power

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Combined Heat and Power Partnership

March 2016

FINAL REPORT

Portfolio Standards and the Promotion of Combined Heat and Power ii

Table of Contents

Section 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Section 2. CHP Design Features and Key Policy Considerations ..................................................... 4

Section 3. National Overview and State Examples.............................................................................. 7

3.1 States with RPS, CES, and APS Requirements for CHP ............................................................................... 7

3.2 States with EERS Requirements............................................................................................................................. 8

3.3 State Examples ................................................................................................................................................................ 8

3.3.1 Treatment of CHP under the APS ..................................................................................................... 10

3.3.2 Treatment of CHP under the EERS .................................................................................................. 11

3.3.3 Treatment of CHP under the AEPS .................................................................................................. 13

3.3.4 Treatment of CHP under the EERS .................................................................................................. 13

Section 4. CHP’s Eligibility in State Portfolio Standards ................................................................ 15

Section 5. Additional Resources ........................................................................................................... 33

Portfolio Standards and the Promotion of Combined Heat and Power iii

List of Figures

Figure 1: States with RPS, CES, and APS Requirements for CHP ...............................................................................7

Figure 2: States with EERS Programs for CHP ....................................................................................................................8

List of Tables

Table 1. Summary of CHP Eligibility ..................................................................................................................................... 16

Portfolio Standards and the Promotion of Combined Heat and Power 1

Section 1. Introduction

Many states have developed portfolio standards to increase the adoption of renewable energy

generation, energy efficiency, and other clean energy technologies. Portfolio standards require utilities

and retail energy suppliers (mostly electricity and sometimes gas) to procure a certain minimum

quantity of eligible energy (typically from renewable sources and other specified supply-side resources)

or achieve a minimum amount of energy efficiency savings (typically from demand-side measures).

Portfolio standards can stimulate market and technology development to help renewable energy and

clean energy sources become economically competitive with conventional forms of electric power. In

this way, portfolio standards can help overcome barriers and create demand for such sources, enabling

states to capture their energy-saving, environmental, and economic benefits.

Combined Heat and Power (CHP), a clean energy technology, is an efficient method of providing electric

power and useful thermal energy (heating or cooling) using a single fuel source. As such, it can replace

or supplement less efficient conventional separate heat and power. CHP provides environmental and

energy benefits due to this higher efficiency and the coincident elimination of transmission losses in

delivering electricity from the power plant to the user. With these benefits, CHP is uniquely qualified to

contribute to a state’s objectives of increasing clean energy mix, both as a supply-side resource and as a

demand-side measure. CHP can help achieve multiple policy goals to address energy and environmental

issues. CHP’s potential to use renewable fuels and decrease environmental impact makes it a candidate

for standards designed to encourage renewable and clean energy resources. CHP’s energy-efficiency

benefits make it a candidate for standards designed to encourage energy-saving measures in a utility’s

portfolio of services.

This paper discusses the different ways CHP is incorporated in portfolio standards. It presents the basic

portfolio standard design approaches (Section II), identifies key CHP- related issues for policymakers to

consider when revising or developing portfolio standards (Section II), and provides state-specific

information on existing standards allowing for CHP (see Sections III and IV). Additional resources are

listed in Section V.

1.1 Background

Portfolio standards have been in place since the late 1990s and early 2000s.1 As of March 2015, some

form of portfolio standards (either an APS, EERS, or RPS) exist in 40 states2 and the District of Columbia.

Most states have portfolio standards to encourage renewable, clean energy resources and energy-

efficiency savings. No two states have the same standards, and some states have several standards. The

1 Some states have emissions performance standards (EPS) for greenhouse gases (GHGs) that establish minimum performance

requirements similar to an energy-efficiency appliance standard. Qualifying facilities and compliance options vary by state. The

standards have output-based limits (in lbs CO2/MWh) and typically apply to electricity-generating plants or the supply portfolio

of a load-serving entity (distribution or wires company). A utility can ensure compliance using various approaches, such as by

balancing its supply portfolio, trading certificates that are created within the power market, and trading project-based

emissions reductions (or carbon offsets) created in other sectors. For more information, refer to RGGI and EPS in Selected

States, RAP Research Brief, August 2010.

2 Some states have established PS, but then later decided to repeal the standards. For example, in February 2015, legislation

was signed repealing West Virginia’s APS.


first few standards were renewable portfolio standards set in place to encourage renewable energy

resources. Several states subsequently added provisions for clean energy or alternative energy sources.3

Restructuring in the electricity market led to an increase in portfolio standards to encourage energy

savings through Energy Efficiency Resource Standards. The three main types of portfolio standards

include:

• Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS)4 or Clean Energy Standards (CES)4 are portfolio standards

designed to increase the contribution of renewable energy and clean energy to the electric

supply mix. They are focused on typical renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, hydro,

geothermal, and biomass, and on clean energy technologies such as CHP. Some states maintain

a broad RPS definition under which renewably fueled CHP systems qualify. There are states that

maintain a CES in parallel to a RPS, and others that have a combined RPS that includes clean

energy sources such as CHP in addition to renewable through separate tiers or targets for these

sources. Examples of states with RPS include California and Connecticut. With all these

standards, CHP is treated as a supply resource with prescribed targets and CHP users can engage

either in the voluntary or compliance market.

• Energy Efficiency Resource Standards (EERS)5 are designed to meet an energy-savings goal

through energy efficiency. They are intended to encourage more efficient generation and

transmission by electric and gas utilities. They are usually focused on end-use energy savings,

but some include other efficiency measures, such as CHP or other high-efficiency distributed

generation (DG) or distribution system improvements. Examples of states with EERS include

Massachusetts and Minnesota.

• Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards (APS)6 are hybrid standards developed to allow energy

efficiency to qualify within a RPS or a CES, and they do so either through targets for a certain

percentage of a supplier’s capacity (MW ) or generation (MW h) to come from sources such as

CHP, coal with carbon capture and storage, or waste-to-energy projects using municipal solid

waste. Examples of states with APS include Massachusetts, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.

As there is no consistent terminology in place to refer to each type of portfolio standard, this paper

refers to each of the standards by the name assigned by the state.

The standards vary in their structure, administration, size, and eligible applications as well as the types

of eligible energy sources. The structure and administration varies based on the state’s electric and gas

market and whether it is regulated or restructured. Typically, legislation creates the general architecture

of the portfolio standard and delegates implementation authority to the state utility regulator (Public

Utility Commission [PUC] or Public Service Commission [PSC]), which is responsible for detailed

rulemaking; guidelines for implementation; and evaluation, measurement, and verification. In some

3 Refer to Heeter and Bird, Including Alternative Energy Resources in State RPS: Current Design and Implementation Experience,

November 2012.

4 Also referred to as Renewable Energy Standard (RES) or Renewable Resource Standard (RRS)

5 Also referred to as Electricity Reduction Goals (ERG), Energy Optimization Standard (EO), and Energy Portfolio Standard (EPS).

6 Also referred to as Alternative Energy Resource Standard (AERS), Alternative and Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard

(AREPS), Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard (AEPS), Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standard (REPS), and

Renewable, Recycled and Conserved Energy Objective.


cases, the PUC or PSC sets the numerical target rather than the state legislature. In some states, the

responsibility for implementing the portfolio standard is shared with the state’s energy department.

Depending on its objectives, a state sets targets as a percentage of retail sales, but some states set

specific energy targets (energy saved [in kWh], energy output [in kWh] or energy capacity [in kW]).

Some targets are set as a portion of expected load growth (e.g., as in Texas) or a percentage reduction in

peak demand for electricity (e.g., as in Colorado). Depending on the type of standard, qualifying projects

demonstrate compliance with energy credits that can be traded in the voluntary or compliance market,

or achieve energy savings that are measured and verified. Portfolio standards policies that have binding

targets can also include compliance requirements, fulfillment of which must be demonstrated

periodically (typically annually).

The approaches used to incorporate resources including CHP into portfolio standards have varied

significantly by state. States have used three primary approaches to include CHP and other resources in

portfolio standards:

1. Include CHP as a generally eligible resource in a state’s portfolio standard. Under this approach,

CHP qualifies as one of several resources in the state’s portfolio standards, and all qualified

resources can meet the compliance target. Typically, all eligible resources are credited at the

same value. Indiana is an example of a state that has enacted this type of standard (voluntary

RPS goals).

2. Establish separate tiers for CHP within an existing portfolio standard. This approach creates

separate targets, or tiers, for CHP, detailing specific targets and defining whether it is treated as

a renewable, clean energy, or an energy efficiency measure. With this approach, the standard

defines a target under which CHP qualifies and can also include hybrid standards where CHP

targets are set in a separate tier based on CHP’s energy savings potentials. For example,

Connecticut has three separate tiers under its RPS. The third tier, known as “Class III,” requires

suppliers to obtain 4 percent of their retail load from customer- sited CHP and certain other

resources.

3. Establish a separate portfolio standard with specific sub targets for CHP. With this approach, a

state establishes a separate portfolio standard with subtargets for CHP (and other resources).

For example, Massachusetts established an APS in 2009 that is separate from the state’s RPS

program but functions in the same general manner. The APS requires 5 percent of the state’s

electric load to be met with “alternative energy” resources by 2020. In 2012, 99.1 percent of the

APS requirement was met by CHP systems.7

7 The Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) has issued reports reviewing existing

portfolio standards and their values. For example, a 2008 report found that, assuming full compliance, current mandatory RPS

programs will “require the addition of roughly 60 gigawatts (GW) of new renewable capacity by 2025, equivalent to 4.7 percent

of projected 2025 electricity generation in the U.S., and 15 percent of projected electricity demand growth.” Massachusetts’

APS shows the clear increase in CHP, which reflects the state mandate.


Section 2. CHP Design Features and Key Policy Considerations

States have accounted for CHP in portfolio standards based on the overall program objectives, such as

promote more efficient generation, reduce GHG emissions, or encourage supply diversity. CHP-related

design features, therefore, vary among state portfolio standards:

1. Voluntary or Mandatory Standards. States have either mandatory or voluntary portfolio

standards. Mandates have created a clear pathway to increase the use of resources such as

CHP.8 Voluntary goals typically carry nonbinding targets with no penalties for failure to comply.

2. CHP System Attributes in Portfolio Standards. Some standards define CHP system

characteristics, such as specific power-to-heat ratios, cost-effectiveness thresholds, and other

eligibility requirements that systems be installed before or after specific dates. Most standards

define the following CHP attributes:

a. CHP System Type. States have varying definitions concerning CHP eligibility in their portfolio

standards. For example, in some states, all CHP types using a variety of fuels, not just

renewables, qualify as eligible technology, while in other states (e.g., Colorado, Nevada,

North Dakota), waste heat-to-power qualifies as an eligible CHP technology, but typical CHP

does not.

b. Size Limits. Some states have minimum and/or maximum system size limits under their

portfolio standard programs. For example, New York allows only CHP systems of 50 kW or

larger to qualify under its RPS.

c. Efficiency Threshold. Some states have incorporated various CHP efficiency metrics into

their standards. A handful of states have minimum CHP operating efficiency requirements,

such as the minimum level of 50 percent set in the Connecticut RPS. In certain states, more

efficientsystems earn more credit per unit of output (e.g., Connecticut RPS,9 Massachusetts

APS). Massachusetts’ APS provides credit for CHP based on the efficiency of the system

compared to that of grid-supplied electricity and an onsite boiler producing the same

electric and thermal output as the CHP system.

d. Fuel Use. In a number of states, CHP would qualify under a renewable portfolio standard

irrespective of fuel type used. Some portfolio standards, however, only recognize certain

fuel-type CHP systems, such as Arizona’s Renewable Electricity Standard (RES), which allows

only renewably fueled CHP to qualify.10

3. Accounting for CHP’s Benefits in Portfolio Standards. A CHP system’s benefits are accounted

for based on its energy output, energy capacity, or energy savings. Some portfolio standards

encourage eligible resources such as CHP by issuing tradable credits for the energy generated.

These are commonly seen with RPS, where credits can be sold at market prices to utilities or

other entities to demonstrate compliance with the portfolio targets. Typically, one MW h of

eligible generation or energy savings may earn one credit. The value of credits differs based on

8 Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources. “Massachusetts RPS & APS Annual Compliance Report for 2012.” April 22,

2014. http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/doer/rps-aps/rps-aps-2012-annual-compliance-report-042214.pdf.

9 Where the revenue from the renewable energy credits for qualifying facilities are divided between the customer and the state

Conservation and Load Management Fund, depending on when the Class III systems are installed.

10 It is important to note that Arizona’s EERS may allow fossil-fueled CHP to qualify.


the stringency of the portfolio standard targets, eligibility guidelines, and other factors. Other

portfolio standards encourage eligible resources by providing financial incentives based on

system performance or energy savings and are commonly seen in EERS. Measurement and

verification is a critical component to CHP’s inclusion in a portfolio standard. There are various

ways to account for CHP:

a. Accounting for CHP Electrical and Thermal Output. A CHP system provides electrical and

thermal outputs that may be taken into account in assessing its benefits. Some states

account for only the electric output from CHP systems (typically based on a metered output

[e.g., MW h]) in determining credit for the portfolio standards. Other states account for

both the electrical and thermal output (typically based on measured heat produced [Btu]

converted to MW h or other equivalents).

b. Credit In Comparison to Other Resources. CHP can receive full credit on par with other

resources in the standard (e.g., Michigan, Pennsylvania) or partial credit (e.g.,

Massachusetts APS). States that want to provide a significant incentive for CHP have applied

a credit multiplier (1.5 or 2 credits) for each MW h of eligible CHP generation. If a state goal

is to encourage diverse electricity supply, then that state may credit CHP systems on par

with renewable sources of generation. If the objective is to encourage GHG emission

reductions, then the state may credit the CHP system based on a measure that reflects

actual reductions. How CHP is credited under portfolio standards can be a function of the

overall program objectives.

c. Accounting for CHP’s Efficiency. A CHP system’s efficiency plays a role in portfolio

standards, either in defining a CHP system’s eligibility (for instance, for a performance-based

incentive) or in assessing energy savings (such as in an EERS). Various efficiency metrics exist

for a CHP system that pertain to electricity generation and heat production (the electrical

and thermal output), or an overall operating or system efficiency. The type of efficiency that

is used will depend on the type of portfolio standard.

As these design features demonstrate, policymakers can promote CHP in their portfolio standards

through several different approaches, based on the energy savings and environmental benefits CHP can

provide in producing electricity and thermal energy.

States can benefit from a holistic approach as they develop portfolio standards that support CHP to

ensure that they are taking optimal advantage of CHP’s benefits and to address any conflicting

requirements. As an example, an RPS or an APS can be structured to capture the value of the supply-side

attributes of CHP—the electric and thermal outputs—while an EERS may be designed to recognize the

demand-side benefits of CHP—the energy-efficiency savings (e.g., North Carolina combined RPS/EERS).

Recognizing the variability in state portfolio standards, a state can benefit from consistently attributing

CHP in the portfolio standards by addressing the following key concepts:

1. Define CHP Eligibility Explicitly. Portfolio standards may not sufficiently promote CHP unless

CHP is explicitly identified as an eligible resource (e.g., Massachusetts APS, Connecticut RPS).

Lack of formal recognition of CHP under standards creates uncertainty, which may deter some

projects due to concerns about the timing and cost of the approval process that determines

eligibility. States with specific and distinct tiers and targets for CHP provide well-defined goals to

encourage its use.


2. Define CHP Eligibility Holistically. Currently, there are varying state definitions of CHP eligibility.

Some states allow for waste heat-to-power as an eligible technology within their portfolio

standards, and others only qualify renewably fueled CHP. To secure the energy and

environmental benefits from CHP, it is best to consider all types of CHP systems as eligible

technologies. Assembling the right mix of efficiency requirements, size limits, eligible system

types, start dates, and performance-based incentives for CHP systems will allow a state to

achieve its economic, environmental, and energy supply objectives.

3. Account for CHP’s Benefits Appropriately. As CHP systems vary based on prime mover

technology, fuel, application, and efficiency (total system and electrical),11 their benefits have to

be carefully evaluated so as to provide adequate incentive and safeguards. Important questions

to consider include:

a. How would each of these benefits be accounted for in a portfolio standard? Would they be

accounted for in the same portfolio standard?

b. How would generation and energy savings be measured in the different standards that are

adopted?

c. How can CHP’s electricity and thermal output be effectively credited in an RPS or APS?

d. How can CHP’s savings be effectively accounted for in an EERS? Are there complementary

policies in place, such as public benefit funds, cost- recovery for energy-efficiency measures,

or reducing or eliminating throughput incentives, that will make the EERS more effective?

At this time, the type and the manner in which CHP is integrated varies by state. Different approaches

are in place to account for CHP electrical and thermal outputs as well as to calculate CHP efficiency

savings.

11 www.epa.gov /chp/basic/methods.html.


Section 3. National Overview and State Examples

This section and the more detailed table that follows in Section IV present a national overview on how

CHP is incorporated in state portfolio standards, a range of state examples, selected state case studies,

and state-specific data. A list of additional resources is also provided.

3.1 States with RPS, CES, and APS Requirements for CHP

Currently, 39 states and the District of Columbia have some form of APS or RPS (either voluntary or

mandatory), as shown in Figure 1. Of these states, 20—Arizona, Connecticut, Colorado, Hawaii, Indiana,

Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma,

Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont andWashington—specifically call out CHP

and/or waste heat-to-power (WHP) as eligible under their RPS or APS program guidelines.

The other 19 states and the District of Columbia do not explicitly mention CHP; however, they may allow

these systems to qualify if they use an eligible fuel. For instance, if biomass is a qualifying fuel under an

RPS, and a CHP system is biomass-fired, then that CHP system would potentially be eligible to receive

credit under the portfolio standard.

Figure 1: States with RPS, CES, and APS Requirements for CHP

Source: ICF International, C2ES, and the DSIRE database, 2015.


3.2 States with EERS Requirements

Figure 2 shows the states with EERS programs and states that include energy-efficiency targets in their

RPS programs (effectively functioning as EERS). Eighteen states—Arizona, Connecticut (administered as

part of RPS),12 Delaware, Hawaii (administered as part of RPS until 2015), Illinois, Maryland,

Massachusetts, Minnesota, Michigan (administered as part of RPS), Nevada (administered as part of

RPS), New York, North Carolina (administered as part of AEPS), North Dakota (administered as part of

RPS), Ohio, Oklahoma (administered as part of RPS), Rhode Island, South Dakota (administered as part

of RPS) and Washington (administered as part of RPS)— specifically call out CHP or WHP as eligible in

some form under their EERS regulations.

Figure 2: States with EERS Programs for CHP

Source: ICF International, C2ES, and the DSIRE database, 2015.

3.3 State Examples

Below are examples of how several states have incorporated CHP into their standards:

Connecticut is an example of an RPS program that includes separate tiers for specific categories of

resources. The state’s RPS was originally promulgated in 1998 and was revised in 2005 and 2007. In

2005, Connecticut added a third tier to the resource requirements, establishing a new RPS Class III which

included CHP, demand response, and electricity savings from conservation and load management

12 Connecticut’s Class III requirement under their RPS is oftentimes referred to by organizations such as DSIRE as an EERS.

However, this efficiency tier is implemented under the RPS structure.


(C&LM) programs. In 2007, the Class III standard was expanded to include waste heat recovery

systems.13

The RPS requires electric suppliers and distribution companies to obtain 1 percent of their generation

from Class III resources beginning in 2007, increasing by 1 percent per year until leveling out at 4

percent in 2010 and thereafter. The Class III targets effectively serve as an EERS. Specific elements of the

Class III standard include:

1. Eligible CHP systems must have been developed on or after January 1, 2006.

2. Eligible systems that recover waste heat or pressure from commercial and industrial processes

must have been installed on or after April 1, 2007.

3. Existing units that have been modified on or after January 1, 2006 may earn certificates only for

the incremental output gains.

4. A CHP system must meet an overall efficiency level of at least 50 percent.

5. The sum of all useful electrical energy output must constitute at least 20 percent of the system’s

total usable energy output.

6. The sum of all thermal energy outputs must also constitute at least 20 percent of the

technology’s usable energy output.

7. Annual fuel-conversion efficiency and percentages of production are assessed quarterly for the

first year after initial certification. Customers that install Class III resources on or after January 1,

2008, are entitled to Class III credits equal to at least 1 cent per kW h. The revenue from these

credits must be divided between the customer and the state C&LM fund based on when the

Class III resources are installed, whether the customer is residential or nonresidential, and

whether the resources received state support or not.14

More information can be found at http://www.ct.gov/pura/cwp/view.asp?a=3354&q=415186.

New York is an example of a state portfolio standard program with a separate tier under which CHP is

eligible (although only certain CHP technologies are eligible).

The New York State PSC adopted an RPS in September 2004 and issued implementation guidelines in

2005. The RPS was originally set at 25 percent of state electricity sales by 2013 but was expanded in

January 2010 to 30 percent by 2015. Two tiers are used to meet the RPS: 1) a main tier, and 2) a

customer-sited tier (CST). The CST was revised when the overall RPS target was increased in 2010, and it

now includes CHP systems of 50 kW or larger.

New York’s RPS is managed differently than most other state programs and works through a central

procurement model. Electric utilities collect a surcharge on electricity sold to consumers. These funds

13 Class III is defined as: “the electricity output from combined heat and power systems with an operating efficiency lev el of no

less than fifty percent that are part of customer-side distributed resources dev eloped at commercial and industrial facilities in

this state on or after January 1, 2006, a waste heat recovery system installed on or after April 1, 2007, that produces electrical

or thermal energy by capturing preexisting waste heat or pressure from industrial or commercial processes, or the electricity

savings created in this state from conservation and load management programs begun on or after January 1, 2006."

14 BGC Environmental Brokerage Services, www.bgcebs.com/Renewables/.


are turned over to the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), which

purchases renewable energy credits (RECs) on behalf of all the regulated entities to fulfill the RPS.

In addition, there is a separate pool of funds designated for the CST, with specific funding allocations for

different technologies. Funding for CHP systems will be provided for eligible technologies through a

combination of capacity- and performance-based incentives. Eligible technologies include CHP systems

fueled by anaerobic digestion biogas, systems fueled by renewable biogas (including systems co-fired

with renewable biogas), and fuel cells fueled by any fuel. Incentives can be based on either capacity

(kW) or output (kWh) and are awarded through competitive solicitations.15

More information can be found at

http://documents.dps.ny.gov/public/Common/ViewDoc.aspx?DocRefId={C05CD0D6-8EA5-4CB9-A9FA-

6ADD3AECB739}.

New York’s RPS stopped accepting new customers in 2016, as the state transitions to the Clean Energy

Fund, but many RPS projects are still receiving funding from NYSERDA, and the program has provided

support to a large number of CHP installations in both the main and customer-sited tiers.

Massachusetts has established an APS and an EERS, in addition to the state’s RPS. CHP qualifies under

both the APS and EERS (renewably fueled CHP can qualify under the RPS), and CHP projects are eligible

to pursue credit under both programs. The state- passed Green Communities Act in 2008 called for an

APS that includes CHP and an EERS that sets separate targets for demand-side resources, including

behind-the- meter CHP systems.

3.3.1 Treatment of CHP under the APS

The APS establishes a target of 5 percent of retail electricity suppliers’ sales being from alternative

energy sources by December 31, 2020, and defines an alternative energy source as one that generates

electricity using any of the following: CHP, gasification with capture and permanent sequestration of

carbon dioxide, flywheel energy storage, paper- derived fuel sources, or energy-efficient steam

technology. Under Massachusetts' APS regulations, CHP must have begun operation on or after January

1, 2008. Existing units can receive credit for their added incremental useful thermal energy or useful

electrical energy. Only those additions made on or after January 1, 2008, qualify. A net CO2 emissions

rate of 890 lbs/MW h also applies.16

CHP and other eligible projects can receive one credit, referred to as the “APS Alternative Energy

Certificates” (AEC) for one MWh of electrical energy output or for thermal output using a conversion

factor of 3.412 MMBtus = 1 MW h. The Alternative Energy Certificates (AECs) earned by a CHP unit

represent the energy saved by operating the CHP unit compared to separately operating an on-site

15 State of New York Public Service Commission (PSC). Case 03-E-0188 – Proceeding on Motion of the Commission Regarding

Retail Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). Order Authorizing Customer-Sited Tier Program Through 2015 and Resolving

Geographic Balance and Other Issues Pertaining to the RPS Program. April 2, 2010.

http://documents.dps.ny.gov/public/Common/ViewDoc.aspx?DocRefId={30CFE590-E7E1-473B-A648-450A39E80F48}

16 The term “net” refers to the sum of emission increases and decreases. For a generation unit, it includes carbon dioxide

emissions related to combustion, gasification, fuel processing, and sequestration, whether or not such activities occur at the

generation unit or another location; in the case of a CHP unit, it also includes emissions from thermal delivery.


thermal plant while drawing electricity from the grid.17 AECs are granted for eligible CHP units equal to

the result, if positive, of the following calculation:

1. Take the sum of the following two:

a. The electrical energy generated divided by the overall efficiency of electrical energy

delivered to the end-use from the electrical grid (0.33 for this purpose).

b. The useful thermal energy, expressed in MW h, divided by the overall efficiency of thermal

energy delivered to the end-use from a standalone heating unit (0.80 for this purpose).

2. Then, subtract from this sum: The total of all fuel and any other energy consumed by the CHP

unit in that quarter expressed in MW h and calculated using the energy content of the fuel

based on its higher heating value.

Eligible CHP units must provide for the metering of electrical energy generated, useful thermal energy

produced, and fuel consumed, and for calculating the net quantity of MW h for which AECs are

awarded. Further details on this calculation can be accessed at www.mass.gov/eea/energy-utilities-

clean-tech/renewable-energy/rps-aps/rps-and- aps- program-summaries.html.

At the end of 2012, 99.1 percent of the standard was met through CHP systems. The total APS target for

2012 was 1,185,236 MWh.18 Massachusetts AECs were priced at $21.02/MW h in 2012.19

More information can be found at www.mass.gov/eea/energy-utilities-clean-tech/renewable-

energy/rps-aps/rps-and-aps-program-summaries.html.

Legislation passed in August 2012 requires that the state's executive office of energy and environmental

affairs study adding technologies that generate "useful thermal energy" to the list of eligible

technologies under this standard. In 2014 legislation was passed, H. 4385, which now includes “useful

thermal energy” as eligible under the APS. “Useful thermal energy” is defined as “energy in the form of

direct heat, steam, hot water or other thermal form that is used in production and beneficial measures

for heating, cooling, humidity control, process use or other valid thermal end use energy requirements

and for which fuel or electricity would otherwise be consumed.”20

3.3.2 Treatment of CHP under the EERS

Massachusetts also has a program that effectively functions as an EERS, as it has energy savings targets.

This program provides a rebate payment to help meet the energy-efficiency targets and does not

provide a tradable credit system (i.e., it is not market-based). The program stipulates that the state meet

at least 25 percent of electric load by 2020 with demand-side resources, including: “energy efficiency,

17 Department of Energy Resources (DOERS). Massachusetts Renewables and Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards (RPS &

APS) Annual Compliance Report for 2010. January 11, 2012. www.mass.gov/eea/docs/doer/rps/rps-aps-2010-annual-

compliance-rpt-jan11-2012.pdf.

18 Department of Energy Resources (DOERS). Massachusetts Renewables and Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards (RPS &

APS) Annual Compliance Report for 2012. April 22, 2014. http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/doer/rps-aps/rps-aps-2012-annual-

compliance-report-042214.pdf.

19 Ibid.

20 House Committee on Ways and Means. H. 4385. 2014. https://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/House/H4385/.


load management, demand response, and generation that is located behind a customer’s meter21,

including a combined heat and power system with an annual efficiency of 60 percent or greater, with

the goal of 80 percent annual efficiency for combined heat and power systems by 2020.” The EERS

program, which started as a pilot in 2009, is known as the Mass Save Ratepayer-Funded Energy

Efficiency program. CHP systems can qualify under both the APS and the EERS if they meet all necessary

criteria under both programs.

Under the Mass Save Ratepayer-Funded Energy Efficiency program, CHP systems are eligible for the

following incentives:

• Payments for feasibility studies, procurement, and installation.

• For projects ≤ 150 kW , a payment of $750/kW h capacity, up to a maximum incentive of

$112,000.

• For projects >150 kW , the payment amount is determined by the utility administrator, but it can

be 50 percent of the installed cost for small to medium- sized projects.

• For systems greater than 2 MW , the incentive amount is determined by the funds available.22

To qualify, CHP systems must also have a minimum efficiency of 60 percent, with fuel input expressed

on a higher heating value (HHV) basis, and must also pass a cost- effectiveness screening threshold

established by the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU), which results in a benefit to cost

ratio ≥ 1.0.23

North Carolina is an example of a state portfolio standard program with a separate target for energy

efficiency under which CHP is eligible. In August 2007, North Carolina enacted a Renewable Energy and

Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standard (REPS) requiring all investor-owned utilities to supply 12.5 percent

of 2020 retail electricity sales from eligible energy resources by 2021. Municipal utilities and electric

cooperatives must meet a target of 10 percent eligible energy resources by 2018. Up to 25 percent of

the requirements may be met through energy-efficiency measures, including CHP. After 2018, up to 40

percent of the standard may be met through energy efficiency, including CHP.

Under the REPS, no minimum efficiency requirement exists for CHP. Energy from CHP is included to the

extent that the system “uses waste heat to produce electricity or useful, measurable thermal or

mechanical energy for the retail customers’ use and results in less energy used to perform the same

function or provide the same level of service at the retail customer’s facility.” Thermal energy that is not

21 John Ballam, Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources, “Use of an Alternative Energy Standard Portfolio Standard by

Mass for the Support of CHP,” MA Department of Energy

Resources.http://www.energy.ca.gov/2012_energypolicy/documents/2012-02-

16_workshop/presentations/11_Ballam_Mass_DER.pdf.

22 Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DOER). “Use of an Alternative Energy Standard Portfolio Standard by Mass

for the Support of CHP.”

23 Mass Save: Savings through Energy Efficiency. “Combined Heat and Power (“CHP”) Program: Guidebook for Submitting CHP

Applications for an Energy Efficiency Incentive in Massachusetts.”November 18, 2010. November 18, 2010.

http://www.masssave.com/business/building-or-equipment-

upgrades/find-incentives/~/media/Files/Business/Applications%20and%20Rebate%20Forms/CHP%20Incentive%20Guidebook%

20-%20dated%2011-18-10.ashx.


used to generate electric power, and is measured accurately in Btus, earns equivalent RECs using a

conversion factor of 3,412 Btu per kW h. Renewable energy and CHP must be installed after January 1,

2007, to be considered eligible.

Utilities may meet their obligations through actual generation of electricity with eligible fuels and

technologies, through the purchase of RECs (each equivalent to 1 MW h) from in-state or out-of-state

renewable energy facilities, or through the implementation of energy-efficiency measures.

The North Carolina Utilities Commission issued final REPS regulations under Order, Docket No. E-100,

Sub 113, on February 28, 2009. This Order can be found at:

http://starw1.ncuc.net/NCUC/ViewFile.aspx?Id=84e6ed39-314a-41b0-bd8a-ac69c4ad0a84.

Ohio is an example of a state that has included different forms of CHP under separate portfolio

standards. In May 2008, Ohio enacted S.B. 221 creating an Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard (AEPS)

that contains “alternative energy resource” requirements for investor-owned utilities, and includes CHP.

S.B. 221 also established a separate energy efficiency portfolio standard (EEPS). However, legislation

passed in 2014, SB 310, significantly weakened both the AEPS and EEPS. Concerning the AEPS, SB 310

froze the renewable targets for two years, removed the in-state requirement for renewable energy

procurement, and pushed back the final renewable benchmark of 12.5% from 2024 to 2026.24 Regarding

the EEPS, SB 310 froze the energy savings requirements for two years, now allows large customers the

option of opting out of the energy savings targets, and expands the types of activities eligible under the

targets.

3.3.3 Treatment of CHP under the AEPS

Under the AEPS, electric utilities must provide 25 percent of the total kWh’s of electricity sold in 2025

from “alternative energy resources.” Both “advanced energy resources” and “renewable energy

resources” qualify under the AEPS. Of the total AEPS requirement of 25 percent, at least half must come

from renewable energy resources and half from advanced energy resources. Renewable energy

resource targets began in 2009 and increase annually, reaching 12.5 percent by the end of 2026.

Legislation passed in 2012 (S.B. 289 and S.B. 315) added certain new technologies to the list of eligible

renewable energy resources; S.B. 289 added CHP using landfill gas/biogas to this definition and S.B. 315

added waste energy recovery systems (WER) which includes waste-heat-to- power. Topping-cycle CHP

systems using eligible renewable fuels qualify as a renewable resource under the original authorization.

Any type of CHP, including fossil fuel-fired systems, qualifies as an “advanced energy resource.”

However, there are no annual compliance targets for advanced energy resources prior to 2025.

Renewable and solar resources are eligible for renewable energy credits (RECs); advanced energy

resources are expected to be eligible for advanced energy credits (AECs) starting in 2025. Eligible

resources must have been placed into service starting January 1, 1998 or after.

3.3.4 Treatment of CHP under the EERS

Ohio’s EEPS targets took effect in 2009, requiring electric distribution utilities to implement energy

efficiency programs that achieve energy savings equivalent to at least 0.3 percent savings from a

baseline that is the average of the total kWh’s sold in the preceding three years. Savings requirements

24 Ohio 129th General Assembly. S.B. 315. http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=129_SB_315.


start at 1 percent per year in 2009 and have been frozen at 4.2% for the 2015 and 2016 compliance

periods. The final target requires cumulative annual energy savings in excess of 22 percent by the end of

2027. There is also a separate target that began in 2009 which requires electric distribution utilities to

implement peak demand reduction programs designed to achieve a 1 percent reduction in peak demand

in 2009 and an additional 0.075 percent each year through 2018.

Recognizing that the AEPS does not provide incentives for non-renewable CHP until 2025, S.B. 315

passed in 2012 added CHP and waste energy recovery (WER) as qualified efficiency measures under the

EEPS. The legislation specifies that WER systems that receive credit under Ohio’s EEPS do not also

qualify under the AEPS. All types of CHP and waste heat-to-power qualify under the EEPS. Under the

energy savings component of the EEPS, projects must have commenced operation or have been

retrofitted on or after September 10, 2012 to qualify. Topping-cycle CHP systems at state institutions of

higher education may qualify if they were placed into service between January 1, 2002 and December

31, 2004. Ohio legislation requires that CHP systems must be “designed to achieve thermal-efficiency

levels of at least sixty percent, with at least twenty percent of the system's total useful energy in the

form of thermal energy.”

In July 2012, The PUCO opened Docket 12-2156-EL-ORD in order to implement the changes from S.B

315, which include both AEPS and EERS provisions.


Section 4. CHP’s Eligibility in State Portfolio Standards

Table 1 provides a summary of CHP eligibility in state portfolio standards. For each state, the table

indicates if there is an RPS, EERS, or APS in place, and the type of CHP eligible under the standard(s). As

there is no consistent terminology in place to refer to each type of portfolio standard, the table refers to

them by the name assigned by the state. In some states, fossil-fueled topping- cycle CHP (e.g.,

combustion turbine, steam turbine, reciprocating engine-based systems) and bottoming-cycle (i.e., W

HP systems) are explicitly called out as eligible resources under the portfolio standard(s). Some states,

however, include only waste heat to power systems as eligible. Other states do not explicitly identify

CHP as an eligible resource, but CHP systems can qualify as long as they are powered with a qualifying

renewable fuel/technology.

Note: Typical CHP in this table is defined as fossil-fueled topping-cycle CHP. Under this form of CHP, fuel

is combusted in a prime mover, such as a gas turbine or reciprocating engine, to generate electricity.

Energy normally lost in the prime mover’s hot exhaust and cooling systems is instead recovered to

provide useful thermal energy.


Table 1. Summary of CHP Eligibility

Key:

X – Mandatory Standard

▲ – Voluntary Standard or Goal

State

Portfolio Standard CHP Eligibility

RPS EERS APS Typical CHP Renewably-Fueled Waste Heat to Power

Alaska ▲ RPS:

• Not eligible.

RPS:

• Eligible with qualifying

fuel/technology.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

Arizona X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• May qualify as custom/other

technology, subject to approval.

RPS:

• Renewably-fueled CHP

specifically called out as an

eligible resource.

• CHP system must have an

operation date on or after

January 1, 1997 to qualify for

credit under the portfolio

standard.

EERS:

• Energy savings from CHP

installations that do not qualify

under the RPS may count

toward the EERS.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:



Arkansas X EERS:



EERS:



EERS:



California X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:



RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:



RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:





Key:



State



Colorado X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:



RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:



RPS:

• Eligible (defined as “recycled

energy”).

• Systems must have a nameplate

capacity of 15 MW or less and

convert the otherwise lost

energy from the heat from

exhaust stacks or pipes to

electricity and not combust

additional fossil fuel.

EERS:



Connecticut X X RPS/EERS (combined standard):

• Eligible under separate tier as a

Class III Resource

• Must be installed on or after

January 1, 2006, and have a

minimum operating efficiency of

50 percent.

RPS/EERS (combined standard):


fuel/technology, and eligible

under separate tier as a Class III

Resource Must be installed on or

after January 1, 2006.


• Eligible under separate tier as a

Class III Resource

• Must recover waste heat or

pressure from commercial and

industrial processes, and be

installed on or after April 1, 2007.



Key:



State



Delaware X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• Eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:

• Eligible.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:


energy”).

• Recycled energy must be from a

modification of an industrial or

commercial system that

commenced operation before

July 29, 2009.

District of Columbia X RPS:

• Not eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

Florida ▲ EERS:

• May be eligible with approval.

EERS:


EERS:




Key:



State



Hawaii X X RPS:

• CHP was formerly eligible for

Hawaii’s RPS, but the technology

was moved tothe EERS on

January 1, 2015.

EERS:

• Eligible under the EERS starting

in 2015.

• Implementing rules are under

development.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:

• Eligible under the EERS starting

in 2015.

RPS:

• May be eligible if waste heat is

from CHP; Renewable Electrical

Energy defined as “electric

energy savings brought about by

the use of rejected heat from co-

generation and combined heat

and power systems.”

• Excludes fossil-fueled qualifying

facilities that sell electricity to

electric utility companies and

central station power projects.”

EERS:

• May be eligible under the EERS

starting in 2015.



Key:



State



Illinois X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• CHP qualifies.

• “Energy efficiency measures also

includes measures that reduce

the total Btus of electricity and

natural gas needed to meet the

end use or uses.”

RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:

• CHP qualifies.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• WHP may be eligible based on

the following definition:

• “Energy efficiency measures also

includes measures that reduce

the total Btus of electricity and

natural gas needed to meet the

end use or uses.”

Indiana ▲ RPS:

• Eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

RPS:

• Eligible (defined as “waste heat

recovery from capturing and

reusing the waste heat in

industrial processes for heating

or for generating mechanical or

electrical work”).

Iowa X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:



RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:


technology, subject to approval

RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:



Kansas X RPS:

• Not eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

RPS:

• Not eligible.



Key:



State



Maine X X RPS:

• Eligible as a Class II resource

(Efficient Resources).

• Must have been constructed

prior to January 1, 1997, and

have a minimum efficiency of

60%.

• Must be a qualifying

cogeneration facility under the

Public Utility Regulatory Policies

Act of 1978 (PURPA).

EERS:

• Eligible, but only applies to state

facilities.

RPS:

• Eligible as a Class I (new

renewably-fueled) resource if

the system began operation

after September 1, 2005.

EERS:

• Eligible, but only applies to state

facilities..

RPS:

• Eligible.

• Must be a qualifying

cogeneration facility under the

Public Utility Regulatory Policies

Act of 1978 (PURPA).

• Must meet the Class I and II start

dates based on fuel use.

EERS:

• Not eligible.

Maryland X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• CHP qualifies.

• CHP systems typically have to

meet a minimum efficiency of

65%.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:

• CHP qualifies.

• CHP systems typically have to

meet a minimum efficiency of

65%.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:





Key:



State



Massachusetts X X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• Eligible. CHP targets part of

Green Communities Act.

• Must meet an efficiency

threshold > 60 percent.

APS:

• Eligible using natural gas.

• Units must deliver their useful

thermal energy to a load in

Massachusetts.

• Must have a start date after

January 1, 2008.

• Both electric and thermal energy

qualify.

Net CO2 emissions rate can’t

exceed 890 lbs/MWh.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:



APS:

• Eligible.

Must have a start date after

January 1, 2008.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:



APS:

• Not explicitly included.



Key:



State



Michigan X X APS/EERS(combined):


APS/EERS (combined):


fuel/technology.

• Must have a start date of

October 6, 2008, or later.

APS/EERS (combined):

• Eligible (defined as ‘“Industrial

cogeneration facility” – ‘a facility

that generates electricity using

industrial thermal energy or

industrial waste energy’).

• Must have a start date of

October 6, 2008, or later.

Minnesota X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• CHP is eligible, subject to

approval.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:

• CHP is eligible, subject to

approval.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• Eligible (“Waste heat recovery

converted into electricity”).

Missouri X ▲ RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:



RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:



RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:



Montana X RPS:

• Not eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

RPS:

• Not eligible.



Key:



State



Nevada X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• Eligible. Energy efficiency

savings can meet up to a quarter

of the RPS in any given year.

• Portfolio Energy Credits are used

for compliance and energy

efficiency gets a credit multiplier

of 1.05 (i.e., # of credits =

number of kWh saved x 1.05).

RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:

• Eligible. Energy efficiency

savings can meet up to a quarter

of the RPS in any given year.






RPS:

• Eligible.

• Must have nameplate capacity of

15 MW or less and startup date

on/after January 1, 2005.

EERS:

• Eligible. Energy efficiency savings

can meet up to a quarter of the

RPS in any given year.






New Hampshire X RPS:

• Not eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

RPS:

• “Useful thermal energy,” defined

as renewable energy delivered

from Class I sources that can be

metered and for which fuel or

electricity would otherwise be

consumed is eligible.



Key:



State



• “Useful thermal energy,” is

credited, defined as renewable

energy delivered from Class I

sources that can be metered and

for which fuel or electricity

would otherwise be consumed.

• Thermal energy that is not used

to generate electric power earns

equivalent RECs based on the

end- use energy value of

electricity – 3.412 MMBtus of

useful thermal energy is

equivalent to one megawatt-

hour.

• Systems must have begun

operation after January 1, 2006.

New Jersey X RPS:

• Not eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

New Mexico X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:



RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:



RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:





Key:



State



New York X RPS:

• Digester-gas-fired CHP and fuel

cells using any fuel type are

eligible under the Customer

Sited Tier (CST).

• Must be greater than 50 kW.

• New York is transitioning away

from the RPS towards the Clean

Energy Fund – new projects will

not eligible for RPS funding.

EERS:

• New York’s EERS expired in

2015, and is being replaced by

the Clean Energy Fund, a public

benefits fund

RPS:

• Eligible under CST and under the

main tier with any qualifying

fuel/technology.

• Must be greater than 50 kW.

• New York is transitioning away

from the RPS towards the Clean

Energy Fund – new projects will

not eligible for RPS funding.

EERS:

• New York’s EERS expired in

2015, and is being replaced by

the Clean Energy Fund, a public

benefits fund

RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:





Key:



State



North Carolina X X RPS/EERS (combined standard):

• Eligible.

• Up to 25% of the requirement

may be met through energy

efficiency technologies,

including CHP systems powered

by non- renewable fuels.

• After 2018, up to 40% of the

standard may be met through

energy efficiency, including CHP.





electricity of 3,412 Btu per kWh.

1 REC = 1 MWh.

• 1 MWh of electricity avoided

through efficiency measure = 1

REC.

• Must be installed on/after

January 1, 2007.



fuel/technology.



efficiency technologies,

including CHP.








electricity of 3,412 Btu per kWh.

1 REC = 1 MWh.

• 1 MWh of electricity avoided

through efficiency measure = 1

REC.


January 1, 2007.


• Eligible.



efficiency technologies, including

CHP systems powered by non-

renewable fuels.





January 1, 2007.

North Dakota ▲ RPS:

• Not eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

RPS:


energy”). (The term "recycled energy system" does not include waste heat captured from any system designed primarily to generate electricity.)



Key:



State



Ohio X/▲a

X EERS:

• Eligible.

• Must be installed or retrofitted

on/after September 10, 2012.

• Must have efficiency of > 60

percent.

• Must have > 20 percent of

system output in the form of

useful thermal energy.

APS/RPS:

• Eligible as an “advanced energy

resource” but compliance with

targets does not have to be

demonstrated until 2025.

• Must have efficiency of at least

60%.

• At least 20% of system output

must be in the form of useful

thermal energy.

EERS:

• Eligible.



APS/RPS:


fuel/technology.

• Systems must have been placed

into service on or after January

1, 1998.

EERS:

• Eligible (defined as “waste

energy recovery”) - can only

qualify under one standard).



APS/RPS:

• Eligible (defined as “waste

energy recovery”) - can only

qualify under one standard).



a S.B. 310 passed in 2014 now allows for large customers an option of opting out of the energy efficiency requirements.



Key:



State



Oklahoma ▲ ▲ RPS/EERS (combined):

• Not eligible.

RPS/EERS (combined):


fuel/technology.

• DG systems using renewable

fuels are limited to < 5 MW.

RPS/EERS (combined):

• Eligible.

• Up to 25% of the renewable

energy goal can be met with

demand side management (DSM)

and energy efficiency.

• WHP qualifies as a DSM measure.

DSM includes industrial by-

product technologies consisting

of the use of a by-product from

an industrial process, including

the reuse of energy from exhaust

gases or other manufacturing by-

products that are used in the

direct production of electricity at

the facility of a customer.

Oregon X RPS:

• Not eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

Pennsylvania X X EERS:



APS:

• Eligible.

• Tier II resources include new and

existing demand- side

management and DG systems,

including CHP.

EERS:



APS:

• Eligible.

• CHP with eligible

fuel/technology counts as Tier I

resource.

EERS:



APS:

• Eligible.

• Tier II resources include new and

existing demand-side

management and DG systems,

including waste heat to power.



Key:



State



Rhode Island X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• Eligible.

• Utilities must establish energy

efficiency procurement plans

which include target

percentages for CHP.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:

• Eligible.



which include target

percentages for CHP.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• Eligible.



which include target percentages

for CHP.

South Carolina ▲ RPS:

• Not eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

South Dakota ▲ RPS:

• Not eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

RPS:


energy”).

Texas X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• CHP systems up to 10 MW in

size are eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:

• CHP systems up to 10 MW in

size are eligible.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:



Utah ▲ RPS:

• Not eligible.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

RPS:

• Eligible (defined as “waste gas or

waste heat capture or recovery

system”).



Key:



State



Vermont X X RPS:

• Not Eligible.

EERS:



• Eligible as a “conservation

measure” under energy

efficiency targets.

• Thermal output must be at least

33% of total energy output, and

system must be in place on/after

March 31, 1999.

RPS


fuel/technology.

• Systems must have come into

service after December 31,

2004.

EERS:




fuel/technology.

• DG with output of 5 MW or less

may be counted as double the

facility's electrical output under

certain conditions.

RPS:

• Not explicitly included.

EERS:



• Eligible as a “conservation

measure” under energy

efficiency targets.

Washington X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• Highly efficient CHP systems –

that is, systems with a useful

thermal energy output of no less

than 33% of the total energy

output – count towards a

utility’s conservation target.

RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:

• Highly efficient CHP systems –

that is, systems with a useful

thermal energy output of no less

than 33% of the total energy

output – count towards a

utility’s conservation target.

RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:

• May be eligible, subject to

approval.



Key:



State



Wisconsin X X RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:



RPS:


fuel/technology.

EERS:



RPS:

• Not eligible.

EERS:




Section 5. Additional Resources

1. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). “Energy Efficiency Resource

Standards (EERS).” www.aceee.org/topics/eers.

2. Barbose, Galen, Charles Goldman, and Jeff Schlegel. “The Shifting Landscape of Ratepayer-

Funded Energy Efficiency in the U.S.” October 2009. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

http://energy.gov/oe/downloads/shifting-landscape-ratepayer-funded-energy-efficiency-us.

3. Brown, Mathew. “Brief #9, “The Energy Efficiency Resource Standard: Observations on an

Emerging State Policy.” Alliance to Save Energy.

4. Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES). Energy Efficiency Standards and Targets.

www.c2es.org/us-states-regions/policy-maps/energy-efficiency-standards.

5. Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES). Renewable & Alternative Energy Portfolio

Standards. http://www.c2es.org/us-states-regions/policy-maps/renewable-energy-standards.

6. Clean Energy States Alliance. www.cleanenergystates.org/resource-library/.

7. Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (DSIRE). www.dsireusa.org/.

8. Elliott, R. Neal, et al. “CHP Savings and Avoided Emissions in Portfolio Standards.” 2009

American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) Summer Study on Energy Efficiency

in Industry. www.aceee.org/proceedings-paper/ss09/panel04/paper11.

9. Heeter, Jenny and Lori Bird. “Including Alternative Resources in State Renewable Portfolio

Standards: Current Design and Implementation Experience.” November 2012. National

Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/55979.pdf.

10. Kolwey, Neil. “Calculating Net Electricity Savings from Utility-Supported CHP Projects.” August

2012. Southwest Energy Efficiency Project.

http://swenergy.org/publications/documents/CHP%20Electricity%20Savings%20for%20Utilities

%20-%20August%202012.pdf.

11. Nadel, Steve. “Energy Efficiency Resource Standards: Experience and Recommendations.” March

2006. ACEEE Report E063.

http://www.dnrec.delaware.gov/energy/information/Documents/EERS/EERS%20Experience%20

and%20Recommendations.pdf.

12. Sciortino, Michael, et al. “Energy Efficiency Resource Standards: A Progress Report on State

Experience.” June 2011. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE).

www.aceee.org/sites/default/files/publications/researchreports/u112.pdf.

13. Galen, Barbose. “Renewable Portfolio Standards in the United States: A Status Update.”

September 2014. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

http://emp.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/2014%20RPS%20Summit_Barbose.pdf